No 2 (2024)

The article examines three multi-genre texts of the final year of A.S. Pushkin's life: the letter to Pyotr Chaadayev, The Captain's Daughter, and the Kamennoostrovsky Cycle. These pieces, being particularly important for the last stage of Pushkin’s history and bibliography, can be referred to as the poet’s three testaments. Although each of these works emphasizes a different aspect of the Russian national character, which, according to Pushkin, stems from the Orthodox faith, they all share a deep rootedness in national history, love for the homeland, Russia’s universality and panhumanism, and free obedience to God’s will based on the Orthodox hope for life after death. The author illustrates how this spiritual program is embodied in the mentioned texts and references citing the testimonies of Mikhail Prishvin and Fyodor Dostoevsky to demonstrate how the intuition of some literary artists in comprehending Pushkin’s central notion might surpass actual literary understanding.

This article considers the phenomenon of Alexander Pushkin to be a value vector for the development of Lermontov’s artistic and personal genius. Following an examination of reminiscences of Pushkin’s works in Lermontov’s bibliography, the author concludes that Pushkin’s legacy was at the root of the formation of Lermontov’s historical views and served as the foundation for his understanding of nationality as acceptance of the spiritual and moral guidelines of Russian culture. It is in his dialog with Pushkin that Lermontov comprehends the ontological underpinnings of human existence. Pushkin’s heritage manifests itself both at the speech and value-semantic levels of the text. Lermontov progresses from direct borrowings, which indicate acceptance of Pushkin’s worldview as unquestionably true, to peer-to-peer dialog, in which Pushkin’s discourse not only serves as semantic support, but also unfolds its spiritual perspective. Lermontov sees Pushkin’s writings as both an existent and recognized legacy of a genius and an insight into his inner life.

Alexander Pushkin’s Boris Godunov (1825), Aleksey Tolstoy’s Tsar Boris (1869), and Alexander Ostrovsky's Kozma Zakhar'yich Minin-Sukhoruk (1861, 1866) were written at a period of turmoil in Russia. The playwrights bring up the issue of decisions that a person must make while taking on responsibility for an entire country. Pushkin’s and Tolstoy’s plays incorporate Shakespearean themes such as challenging fate, obsession, guilty conscience, trial, and redemption. Pushkin’s and Tolstoy’s works also depict impostors throwing the country into disarray, relishing the turbulence, and thirsting for power. The writers include demonic images haunting these characters. Pushkin contrasts Boris Godunov with Ivan the Terrible, who repented before his death, and the meek Tsar Fyodor. In Tolstoy’s drama, Tsar Boris is portrayed as an ideologist who aspires to be ansuperman . Like Pushkin’s hero, he has a demonic vision. People in Pushkin’s drama refuse to make a decision, but as they witness a new atrocity in the final scene, their self-awareness wakes. Pushkin’s and Ostrovsky’s historical dramas are founded on the motifs of obedience to God’s will and the assistance of divine forces, as seen in early Russian literature. Their works depict the righteous, including the chronicler Pimen, the patriarch Job, the fools Nikolka and Grigory, Marfa Borisovna, and Minin. These characters set aside their personal interests in favor of the greater good. Minin is given a vision of St. Sergius of Radonezh, the patron saint of Russia. The vision of the foolish Gregory changes as the Russian people make a choice that determines their fate. Pushkin’s and Ostrovsky’s dramas draw on the early Russian hagiographic literature and military narratives, with visions, light symbolism, prayer before combat, and farewell kisses. Ostrovsky’s play also depicts a conciliar unity of the people.

The article covers the theoretical and literary lessons gained from an examination of Pushkin’s writings. Pushkin’s poetry shaped the evolution of Russian verse in the 19^th and 20^th centuries. Pushkin’s prose provided fresh impetus to narratology. He proposed a new concept of historical probability, explored the theme of madness, and incorporated esotericism into writing. Among the themes of Pushkin’s writings, which drew inspiration from Europe, are the existential problems of excessive individualism and the absurdity of existence. Pushkin’s poem The Bronze Horseman offers a new perspective on the subject of the person versus the state in 19^th-century European literature: statehood can only triumph through the “private,” existing for the individual. Pushkin’s image of a person with a focus on spiritual values was a significant global novelty.

The article discusses the contradiction between the transparency and accessibility of Pushkin’s writings, on the one hand, and their incomprehensible depth accessible to a small number of “true connoisseurs” (Nikolai Gogol), on the other. The author explores several late “unpublished” poems by Pushkin, which he describes as a “posthumous book.” Vadim Kozhinov draws attention to these poems’ rich poetic historiosophy, pointing out that “being speaks for itself” in each one and highlighting both their remarkable diversity and the integrity of being mirrored in them. The conclusion is that Pushkin’s “posthumous book” is focused on the future, meaning that Pushkin’s poetry is constantly ahead of us, and so is our priceless gift.

Alexander Pushkin is welcome in all segments of society and accepted by various social and spiritual figures. He is accessible to both a seventh-grader and a seventy-year-old academician. Pushkin’s works are marked by their aesthetic universality and artistic internationalism. The Pushkin House was established in 1905 as an eternal memorial to the eternal poet. This article provides an overview of the Pushkin House publications to be released to mark the poet’s anniversary and highlights the role of the Foundation for the 200^th Pushkin Anniversary in the preparation for this important date. It is argued that Pushkin is a genius of norm. At the same time, he remains a great mystery and a riddle, which we must solve without him.